4.  The applicant was born in 1937 and lives in Frătăuţii Vechi.
5.  On 24 June 1993 the applicant, together with C.V. and B.V., his relatives, lodged a civil action against third parties claiming restitutio in integrum of a 0,26 ha piece of land situated in a place called “Ioneşti”.
On 10 July 1998 the Suceava Court of Appeal by a final decision rejected the action, as the third parties had the land titles for the relevant piece of land, which had been obtained in 1995.
The applicant lodged a criminal complaint alleging that the expert in the civil action had given false evidence. On 1 September 1999 the public prosecutor found no grounds for initiating criminal proceedings against the expert.
6.  On 10 March 1999 the Rădăuţi Court of First Instance by a final decision dismissed the applicant’s claim to have the land title of the third parties annulled.
7.  On 5 January 2000 the Rădăuţi Court of First Instance allowed the civil action brought by the applicant together with C.V. and B.V. and ordered the Mayor of Frătăuţii Vechi village, in his capacity as the chairman of the local administrative authorities, to allow them to take possession of 0,26 ha of land situated in Frătăuţii Vechi village, in a place called “Ioneşti”. That judgment became final.
8.  On 16 November 2000 the applicant informed the local authorities that he was claiming the plot of land at Ioneşti, which had been occupied by the third parties, and that he would not accept another plot.
9.  On 22 January 2001 the applicant together with C.V. brought proceedings against the Mayor claiming damages for the unjustified refusal to allow them to take possession of the 0,26 ha of land at Ioneşti.
10.  On 15 February 2001 the local administrative authorities certified in an official record that the applicant had been allowed to take possession of a 0,26 ha plot of land in a place called “Măleni” and that he would be provided with a land title for this plot. The applicant did not sign the official record.
11.  On 2 April 2002 the Suceava Court of Appeal by a final decision rejected the action against the Mayor, considering that there had been no unjustified refusal given that the applicant had been granted possession of another plot of land. The court also noted that the applicant’s action for the annulment of the land title of the third parties who had possession of the land at Ioneşti had been rejected.
12.  The applicant lodged criminal complaints against the Mayor alleging abuse of authority. On 26 April 2001 and 18 March 2003 respectively the public prosecutor found no grounds which would justify initiating a criminal action against the Mayor. On 16 May 2001 and 24 November 2003 respectively these decisions were upheld by the senior prosecutor.
13.  On 15 July 2004 the local administrative authorities certified in an official record that the applicant had been allowed to take possession of a 0,26 ha plot of land in a place called “Popovici” and that he would be provided with a land title for this plot of land. The applicant did not sign the official record.
14.  The applicant brought proceedings for the annulment of the official record of 15 July 2004. On 25 October 2004 the Rădăuţi Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant’s action, considering that the local authorities would not have been able to ensure performance of the judgment of 5 January 2000 and that the decision to grant the applicant an alternative plot of land had been a justified measure.
15.  On 8 March 2005 the Suceava Regional Court allowed an appeal by the applicant and annulled the official record. The court held that by the final decision of 5 January 2000 the applicant had been entitled to the 0,26 ha plot of land at Ioneşti, that the authorities were required to grant him possession of that plot and that the fact that land titles had already been granted in relation to that plot was not a reason to disregard the provisions of the final decision.
That judgment became final.
16.  On 6 June 2008 the applicant informed the Court that at the end of 2007 he had been allowed to take possession of an alternative 0,26 ha plot of land in a place called “Măleni”, and that the situation had been sorted out de facto in January 2008, when he received the land title.